Well it depends on what your actually studying...
1. You have written the code to implement a network bridge, and you want
to test
i. the codes correctness
ii. its ability to handle packets correctly for various
configurations and load
2. You have a network bridge, and you want to
From: Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 10:29:28 +0100
On Feb 14, 2006, at 4:06, Bob Rogers wrote:
>1. Closure still needs a destroy method, and having one is in fact
> sufficient to reclaim contexts that would otherwise be lost.
Ack.
Committed as
Although I have no practical experience with this (yet) the latest
versions of the qemu emulator would appear to support the setting up of
multiple running emulated systems that occupy a common network and could
thus probably be poked into doing what you want.
But it might take a while to set
On Jan 12, 2006, at 12:46, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
The following PMCs wil be removed soon:
- FloatvalArray - use {Fixed,Resizable}FloatArray instead
- StringArray - use {Fixed,Resizable}StringArray instead
The latter is a dummy wrapper around ResizablePMCArray BTW.
These PMCs are gone now
On Feb 16, 2006, at 19:24, Andy Dougherty wrote:
sizeof(opcode_t) != sizeof(void*) is for sure broken.
Well, it used to work, but that was a long time ago. Configure
actually
tests for this case and still claims it will work; perhaps that test
should be changed to emit a much more dire mes
1) the trace output runs now through a dedicated debug interpreter, so
that resource allocations due to creating trace output shouldn't
disturb the running interpreter. Just subroutine call/return info goes
through the original interpreter.
./parrot -t1 foo.pir
should now have the same reso
# New Ticket Created by Allison Randal
# Please include the string: [perl #38584]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=38584 >
Reported on Solaris/SPARC. At first glance it appears to be a failure
in parameter
This bug seems to have resolved itself at least on amd64/linux. Please
re-open this bug if it's still failing for you. Thanks for reporting.
-J
--
This bug seems to have resolved itself.
-J
--
The original bug is resolved. I'll move the Solaris/SPARC test
failures to a new ticket.
Allison
Please resolve patch bugs after applying the patch.
-J
--
Just a quick reminder devs as to that to do when you apply a patch.
You need to:
Take ownership of the bug
Set the patch status to Applied
***Set the Status to resolved***
If nothing else, please at least set the Status to resolved so someone
else doesn't have to clean up the bug trac
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006, Leopold Toetsch via RT wrote:
>
> On Feb 16, 2006, at 17:34, Andy Dougherty wrote:
>
> >
> >> This bug seems to have resolved itself at least on amd64/linux.
> >> Please
> >> re-open this bug if it's still failing for you. Thanks for reporting.
>
> A long long is 64 bit
On Feb 16, 2006, at 17:34, Andy Dougherty wrote:
This bug seems to have resolved itself at least on amd64/linux.
Please
re-open this bug if it's still failing for you. Thanks for reporting.
A long long is 64 bit on amd64/linux this is the standard config and of
course is working.
This
On Wed, 15 Feb 2006, Joshua Hoblitt via RT wrote:
> Please resolve patch bugs after applying the patch.
In this case, I didn't apply the patch, so I didn't close it. Also, in
this case, there's more to it than just the patch -- the underlying
problem is that resizeablebooleanarray is taking 64
On Wed, 15 Feb 2006, Joshua Hoblitt via RT wrote:
> This bug seems to have resolved itself at least on amd64/linux. Please
> re-open this bug if it's still failing for you. Thanks for reporting.
This configuration (intval=long long, opcode=long long, i386/linux) still
fails. Last time I tried
Hello,
I'm currently working on a project that involves dynamically configuring a
network bridge to shape network traffic. I want to set up automated tests
to make sure that data flows the way that it should. This includes blocking
or limiting traffic based on IPs and/or ports. Does anyone have
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
A debug session snippet:
I've changed the syntax now to the more conforming convenience var
syntax for registers:
(gdb) pp $I1
I1=3
$x0 ... $x9 are predefined for x in S,I,N (no PMCs yet)
This is the same as printing HW registers:
(gdb) p $eax
$1 = 135154512
And:
On Wed, 15 Feb 2006, Leopold Toetsch via RT wrote:
> Andy, I've already asked once: don't you have svn access? If no (and if
> you want it) please mail me your auth.perl.org account data, to get you
> svn priv bits.
I do have priv bits, and have on rare occasion used them, but I don't
usually
A debug session snippet:
Breakpoint 1, Parrot_invokecc_p (cur_opcode=0x84c7540,
interpreter=0x82a6008) at core.ops:411
411 PMC * p = $1;
(gdb) help user-defined
User-defined commands.
The commands in this class are those defined by the user.
Use the "define" command to define a command.
20 matches
Mail list logo
